The Wish They Were All Dead Tory Cunt Thread

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

That's stepping into another world of discussion when it comes to climate change. Governments and the companies running them know the increase in profit margins are unsustainable in the long term because the practical methods being used have a limit. You can only cut so many jobs, move so many factories, cut so much social support and provide so much credit before people stop having the basic ability to spend on anything.

But the very nature of capitalism means methods always have to be found to increase the bottom line. So creating fear that unless the consumer stops to save the planet we ourselves will be responsible for its destruction, is the first method being used to curb population growth. Be wary of the colour bin you use, your carbon footprint , where your food comes from what you clean your toilet with. Yes great stuff, brilliant. But it won't work because at the same time they continue to encourage us to keep buying the shit to feed the system, meaning the factories keep churning out shit on a scale that would be far more damaging than our individual activities. Fractional and meaningless percentage drops in their emission rates are then championed as progression. I wouldn't be surprised if disease or worse is the next idea on the agenda if this doesn't work. Mainstream thinking and discussion would dismiss these ideas as delusional, because so many people either swallow the dream or are scared to face up the true reality around them, but I don't see any reason at all why they shouldn't be taken deadly seriously.

Really?...so every Scientist has to buy into a ponzi scheme before being given a research grant?

Basically the recycling bin, hybrid cars etc are a way of people showing they are prepared to shut the stable door after the horse has bolted

It's like how my dog was trying to convince us he was well before we had to have him put to sleep when he had cancer. It's the government/businesses trying to pretend that there is anything we can do about it so not to create panic. We have reached the threshold of 400 PPM of Carbon in the atmosphere which is tolerable for a short period but that level is not falling.

It's called Cognitive Dissonance, and as I've said any drop in the emission rates now would be a token effort. The chances are is that in 200 years time, the human race will have ceased to exist.

As hard as I try, I just can't make myself upset about that.

[Niall_Quinn]

Really?...so every Scientist has to buy into a ponzi scheme before being given a research grant?

Yes.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Yes.

Well that's an immense relief, not that man made climate change is a total fraud.....but that something exists that can restrict you to a one word answer

[Kano]

Really?...so every Scientist has to buy into a ponzi scheme before being given a research grant?

Basically the recycling bin, hybrid cars etc are a way of people showing they are prepared to shut the stable door after the horse has bolted

It's like how my dog was trying to convince us he was well before we had to have him put to sleep when he had cancer. It's the government/businesses trying to pretend that there is anything we can do about it so not to create panic. We have reached the threshold of 400 PPM of Carbon in the atmosphere which is tolerable for a short period but that level is not falling.

It's called Cognitive Dissonance, and as I've said any drop in the emission rates now would be a token effort. The chances are is that in 200 years time, the human race will have ceased to exist.

As hard as I try, I just can't make myself upset about that.

Climate research is huge business, we're talking tens of billions alone when it comes to research funding being handed out. And that's just in the States. Why not try to grab a piece of the pie if you can? What frustrates me is this idea that the science community is whiter than white and not subject to the same corruption that infects every other industry. I guess it's because they are seen as part of the intelligentsia, and thus above such menial things as corruption and/or delivering ego-fueled misinformation. If anyone wants to go back through history they'll find it littered with plenty of both for various reasons. Of course there have and will continue to be great thinkers and people in that community that shape our understanding of the world with genuine contributions but let's not kid ourselves that all involved are working purely for the benefit of mankind. It's naivety of the worst kind.

If the government wanted to avoid panic they would be doing all they can to drop these harmful emissions. These global summits - where they meet and fuck a goat or sacrifice some poor child or whatever it is they do at their banquets - should be very short and sweet if this climate thing was as bad as they suggest. "Look unless the we cut emissions we're all fucked, the money train goes off the rails no matter what" cue everyone putting their heads together to sort it. But they know the truth is its absolute bullshit. The scale of what each country pumps out massively outweighs what we do. If this was a real problem that would fuck everyone over, then why would they propose doing next to nothing about and leaving it in our hands? What they are doing right now is creating panic and gloom, telling us unless we the people change our ways, we're all committing suicide. This isn't a calm or rational approach being put to us, so I can't quite see how it is supposed to be averting mass panic.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

Climate research is huge business, we're talking tens of billions alone when it comes to research funding being handed out. And that's just in the States. Why not try to grab a piece of the pie if you can? What frustrates me is this idea that the science community is whiter than white and not subject to the same corruption that infects every other industry. I guess it's because they are seen as part of the intelligentsia, and thus above such menial things as corruption and/or delivering ego-fueled misinformation. If anyone wants to go back through history they'll find it littered with plenty of both for various reasons. Of course there have and will continue to be great thinkers and people in that community that shape our understanding of the world with genuine contributions but let's not kid ourselves that all involved are working purely for the benefit of mankind. It's naivety of the worst kind.

If the government wanted to avoid panic they would be doing all they can to drop these harmful emissions. These global summits - where they meet and fuck a goat or sacrifice some poor child or whatever it is they do at their banquets - should be very short and sweet if this climate thing was as bad as they suggest. "Look unless the we cut emissions we're all fucked, the money train goes off the rails no matter what" cue everyone putting their heads together to sort it. But they know the truth is its absolute bullshit. The scale of what each country pumps out massively outweighs what we do. If this was a real problem that would fuck everyone over, then why would they propose doing next to nothing about and leaving it in our hands? What they are doing right now is creating panic and gloom, telling us unless we the people change our ways, we're all committing suicide. This isn't a calm or rational approach being put to us, so I can't quite see how it is supposed to be averting mass panic.

See the problem I have with conspiracy theories like this is that it assumes human beings are being duplicitous because they don't do something that would make rational sense.

Self-interest, conflicting interests, the fact that we have made ourselves so dependent on fossil fuels we can't wean ourselves off it....what made you ever think the Human creature is capable of common sense and rationality?. It's as well that it is probably too late anyway.

Taking away all the avenues for government subterfuge, the bottom line is that it's convenient to believe we aren't responsible and there is nothing to worry about. The reason there isn't a global initiative is because there is no way to force countries like China to sign up to it, and their economy is almost dependent on producing ridiculous amounts of carbon emission.

It really isn't like that we can up and leave and go to another planet once we've laid waste to this one, and the fact that there is even still debate about it reinforces my lingering sense that i will be glad when human beings are no longer around. It's frankly astonishing that a race like ours lasted as long as it has.

[Kano]

See the problem I have with conspiracy theories like this is that it assumes human beings are being duplicitous because they don't do something that would make rational sense.

Self-interest, conflicting interests, the fact that we have made ourselves so dependent on fossil fuels we can't wean ourselves off it....what made you ever think the Human creature is capable of common sense and rationality?. It's as well that it is probably too late anyway.

Taking away all the avenues for government subterfuge, the bottom line is that it's convenient to believe we aren't responsible and there is nothing to worry about. The reason there isn't a global initiative is because there is no way to force countries like China to sign up to it, and their economy is almost dependent on producing ridiculous amounts of carbon emission.

It really isn't like that we can up and leave and go to another planet once we've laid waste to this one, and the fact that there is even still debate about it reinforces my lingering sense that i will be glad when human beings are no longer around. It's frankly astonishing that a race like ours lasted as long as it has.

It's really the other way round. We will do something irrational and duplicitous for the simple reason we are human. There's no escaping that. I go by a very simple premise: if you can actually picture it, then it is, has or will happen. And that's based on having a sane mind, one where you understand the limitations of physical laws, rather than someone who believes Wenger can win the CL or something.

These aren't massive leaps of imagination to believe societies are shaped by a body of organisations to their own advantage. We can accept that a small board of directors can influence the lives of thousands of employees. That there is a leader and follower dynamic in the smallest of group settings, so it makes absolute sense that this scales up to bodies that already tell us they are here to govern how we live. Power hunger and manipulation doesn't just apply to dirty foreigners like Mao, or Pol Pot or Stalin, y'know those animals of an uncivilised world we've always been told about. It exists in our friendships, relationships, work places and institutions far and beyond that. Quite simply because people are involved.

And it's not about absolutes, that either the planet is completely fucked or completely safe. That's the choice we always trap ourselves into. Vote Labour or Tory. You're liberal or right-wing. Good or evil. The limitations we place on ourselves and allow to be imposed, is ridiculous. What about a mixture, or more complex make-up? Y'know, something along the lines of the way we as humans are so full of contradictions? If we are, then surely the world around us is too. How can we not be harming the Earth through pumping so much shit into its atmosphere but given big business continues to do so on such a scale with all this information and doomsday scenarios kicking round, I'd wager we are nowhere near the level of self-destruction being suggested. Why aren't we battering the shit out of the US to make a cut along with China, and every other major nation, if the goal is really and truly self-preservation. Yet there is a new President and everyone is building virtual bomb shelters and picketing non-existent concentration camps ahead of the planned Genocide. It's just bullshit smoke and mirrors.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

It's really the other way round. We will do something irrational and duplicitous for the simple reason we are human. There's no escaping that. I go by a very simple premise: if you can actually picture it, then it is, has or will happen. And that's based on having a sane mind, one where you understand the limitations of physical laws, rather than someone who believes Wenger can win the CL or something.

These aren't massive leaps of imagination to believe societies are shaped by a body of organisations to their own advantage. We can accept that a small board of directors can influence the lives of thousands of employees. That there is a leader and follower dynamic in the smallest of group settings, so it makes absolute sense that this scales up to bodies that already tell us they are here to govern how we live. Power hunger doesn't just apply to dirty foreigners like Mao, or Pol Pot or Stalin, y'know those animals of an uncivilised world we've always been told about. It exists in our friendships, relationships, work places and institutions far and beyond that. Quite simply because people are involved.

And it's not about absolutes, that either the planet is completely fucked or completely safe. That's the choice we always trap ourselves into. Vote Labour or Tory. You're liberal or right-wing. Good or evil. The limitations we place on ourselves and allow to be imposed, is ridiculous. What about a mixture, or more complex make-up? Y'know, something along the lines of the way we as humans are so full of contradictions? If we are, then surely the world around us is too. How can we not be harming the Earth through pumping so much shit into its atmosphere but given big business continues to do so on such a scale with all this information and doomsday scenarios kicking round, I'd wager we are nowhere near the level of self-destruction being suggested. Why aren't we battering the shit out of the US to make a cut along with China, and every other major nation, if the goal is really and truly self-preservation. Yet there is a new President and everyone is building virtual bomb shelters and picketing non-existent concentration camps ahead of the planned Genocide. It's just bullshit smoke and mirrors.

Mistyping - Of course human beings don't act rationally, my argument is that they are not capable of doing it on a consistent basis

"How can we not be harming the Earth through pumping so much shit into its atmosphere but given big business continues to do so on such a scale with all this information and doomsday scenarios kicking round, I'd wager we are nowhere near the level of self-destruction being suggested"

Because that's a rational way of looking at it, my contention is human being aren't rational. I work in the public sector and believe me if you can't get joined up thinking in one small organisation....what chance is there of getting it on a far larger scale?.

Why aren't we putting the screws on china?.....1) Ultimately there isn't the political will and 2) We have nothing to leverage against them

All the information tells me if i don't stop smoking i am going to exponentially increase my chances of getting cancer, I don't deny the risk and yet i continue to smoke?. Of course that's a slightly different example to climate change because again, If we stop producing carbon emissions in such a great number or not....will make not a jot of difference.

Well actually that's not true, if we drop carbon emissions down to absolute zero....the process will take ever so slightly longer to happen and there's a chance that a few communities of human beings will survive in a state of nature similar to when we were cave dwellers in the palaeolithic era.

[Kano]

On an individual level yes, we act irrational, even as a group. But to suggest that the people with all the power, the money, resources and access to all of the accurate information you could ever wish for about the world are continuing to panic with no sense of rationality, doesn't make any sense. Yet at the same time how do they continue to run industry and govern in such a cold, calculated matter? Sure, the average Joe is easily whipped up into a frenzy, as we see every other week through the MSM but when you have a group of people across the globe, with so much at their disposal, a clearer idea of where things are heading because of their access to so much, I can't accept there is mass panic in their ranks. The only subject I can see that occurring on is the economy because that has become a beast they are struggling to control any longer.

Your example of work applies to both the private and public sector. The bigger the company typically the more disjointed communication seems to be within it. I've worked for the SFO and large private companies, so experienced both. But that perspective is seen from an employees point of view. Not many people are going to go the extra mile to make things work because most people are clocking in and out for a wage. Purely a mass body of employees paid to work for a single cause but not really motivated to go above and beyond because the pay isn't life changing and the activity pretty dull. But a smaller group of people, or a connecting web of smaller groups, all in positions of corporate or governmental power, all able to retain vast amounts of money? Why wouldn't you do your best to maintain that small club when there is so much to be gained? So in fact, it's not organisation on a far larger scale, that applies to millions and billions of average people in relative terms. But a relatively small club consisting of a few hundred people with huge financial gain to motivate them. Seems a lot more straight forward to me. You can't get more human than being greedy. No need to motivate anyone, or ensure people are still on message, because the end goal does it all. What was the stat again - the richest 62 own more money than half the world? 5 years ago that was 400 people. That dynamic doesn't occur because of the National Lottery.

And the smoking analogy doesn't really scale up to this level of calculated decision making. Smoking is a lifestyle choice, like drinking or shoving a needle in your vain. There are a number of factors that can influence you to start or stop, even if you aware of the dangers. Some of them could possibly be out of your control, even if the final act and ultimate decision comes down to you. People are told "save the world from Eco destruction" while at the same time force fed the dream that they can keep all of the same luxuries and obtain more. If the first world-friendly message was genuine, then the second one shouldn't be at all possible anymore. In fact it's increasingly becoming the opposite, that you can buy MORE stuff at even CHEAPER prices, so those chains around your possessions are even tighter. The guys running industry, whilst (physically) human aren't prone to making rash judgements or becoming lost in panic. Leave that to the traders on the floor, the ones trying to get up the ladder, hungry and dazzled by the numbers on the screen and who can be held responsible of needs be. For the guys at the top it's the opposite, which is how they manage to continually accumulate so much wealth. When you are used to slashing jobs, advocating cheap labour, lying to consumers and slapping around suppliers, then being calculated is just the norm.

[Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie]

On an individual level yes, we act irrational, even as a group. But to suggest that the people with all the power, the money, resources and access to all of the accurate information you could ever wish for about the world are continuing to panic with no sense of rationality, doesn't make any sense. Yet at the same time how do they continue to run industry and govern in such a cold, calculated matter? Sure, the average Joe is easily whipped up into a frenzy, as we see every other week through the MSM but when you have a group of people across the globe, with so much at their disposal, a clearer idea of where things are heading because of their access to so much, I can't accept there is mass panic in their ranks. The only subject I can see that occurring on is the economy because that has become a beast they are struggling to control any longer.

Your example of work applies to both the private and public sector. The bigger the company typically the more disjointed communication seems to be within it. I've worked for the SFO and large private companies, so experienced both. But that perspective is seen from an employees point of view. Not many people are going to go the extra mile to make things work because most people are clocking in and out for a wage. Purely a mass body of employees paid to work for a single cause but not really motivated to go above and beyond because the pay isn't life changing and the activity pretty dull. But a smaller group of people, or a connecting web of smaller groups, all in positions of corporate or governmental power, all able to retain vast amounts of money? Why wouldn't you do your best to maintain that small club when there is so much to be gained? So in fact, it's not organisation on a far larger scale, that applies to millions and billions of average people in relative terms. But a relatively small club consisting of a few hundred people with huge financial gain to motivate them. Seems a lot more straight forward to me. You can't get more human than being greedy. No need to motivate anyone, or ensure people are still on message, because the end goal does it all. What was the stat again - the richest 62 own more money than half the world? 5 years ago that was 400 people. That dynamic doesn't occur because of the National Lottery.

And the smoking analogy doesn't really scale up to this level of calculated decision making. Smoking is a lifestyle choice, like drinking or shoving a needle in your vain. There are a number of factors that can influence you to start or stop, even if you aware of the dangers. Some of them could possibly be out of your control, even if the final act and ultimate decision comes down to you. People are told "save the world from Eco destruction" while at the same time force fed the dream that they can keep all of the same luxuries and obtain more. If the first world-friendly message was genuine, then the second one shouldn't be at all possible anymore. In fact it's increasingly becoming the opposite, that you can buy MORE stuff at even CHEAPER prices, so those chains around your possessions are even tighter. The guys running industry, whilst (physically) human aren't prone to making rash judgements or becoming lost in panic. Leave that to the traders on the floor, the ones trying to get up the ladder, hungry and dazzled by the numbers on the screen and who can be held responsible of needs be. For the guys at the top it's the opposite, which is how they manage to continually accumulate so much wealth. When you are used to slashing jobs, advocating cheap labour, lying to consumers and slapping around suppliers, then being calculated is just the norm.

Again there seems to be this idea of a hive mind at work, there isn't panicking there just isn't any willingness to make anything more than token effort. The Chinese economy is based on large scale production of carbon emission, so they can choose to make hard decisions and potentially deal with millions upon millions unemployed or they can pretend it's not happening. As I've said before cognitive dissonance, weighing up short term interest against long term interest.

[Kano]

Of course there is a hive mind mentality, as I've argued, it exists as every level of human existence, why wouldn't it at the very top? We all gravitate towards those that are similar, so it makes absolute sense that those who are filthy rich do too. Stick to your own basically. Throw in access to power then c'mon, what are you saying here? That it won't be abused and corrupted? It's a sad inevitability that one follows the other and with the very top corrupted, who is left to draw the line? Are we really going to say the multi-millionaire club and above isn't an exclusive old boy network that would see no benefit in practice sharing or collaborating to further maximise their opportunities? Why else do immensely successful businessmen continue to plough on once they've sold their most successful one for a ridiculous amount? Sure the buzz, the thrill etc but that also comes with an increase of zeros in your account too. Why else are politicians so often straight into the business world once they are finished, or at the same time? Their hands are in each other's pockets constantly and they don't even hide that fact.

I mean, how much more proof do we need about this? Corporations provide millions of pounds to election campaigns and we are supposed to believe they are not banging each other behind the scenes? Science fiction writers came up with this preposterous fantasy idea that the state could be watching us all under mass surveillance, that your secrets are no longer your own. Let's even make it a light hearted trashy TV show to accompany the hundreds of cameras that can track you from door to door. Could only happen in a galaxy far far away right? I mean it comes to something that even the shithouse that is the BBC report on a small group of guys who are going round Yemen, Syria and Libya cataloging the serial numbers of abandoned unused weaponry. And their conclusion is that the States once owned them. Well of course. But it's tacked on to the end of a program late at night and rarely spoke of again. Iran-contra anyone? No, that could never happen again or be standard practice. Just an unfortunate one-off. I imagine that even if a statement signed by all the major leaders was published through every single news outlet, telling us that all the rumours and conspiracies were true, a week later it would be business as usual.

The Chinese economy has shifted to the largest emission output because there are so many bloody people living there, plus the entire world realised decades ago it could abuse the non-existent labour rules to manufacture for more profit and also because they have pushed onto the global stage themselves over the past decade. And their unemployment rate is lower than the US, UK, France. Are a lot of those people probably on shit wages? Without a doubt. But who are we to sit on high when half the shit in our house comes from there and our Western lifestyle has thrived off the back of that abusive system? I'm not in the business of defending China or Russia as the poor innocents of the world, as they are just as corrupt and vicious as anyone in the West. But neither am I going to fall into the trap of painting them as the evil enemy, corrupting our poor innocent world, so our lot can claim the high moral ground.